Federal Arrest Stemming from Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting?

(Special thanks go to members freedom12 and 3mperorConstantinE for bringing the following information to my attention.)

First a quote from ATS site owner Springer:

Going forward anyone who posts a thread that seeks to implicate the innocent victims of the Sandy Hook Tragedy, for any reason, and/or posts any
personal information or links to personal information on those people will have their posting privileges restricted and their thread removed without
further discussion or warning.

Please abide by our hosts’ guidelines when posting in this thread. For the sake of this discussion, we are predicating our remarks on the belief
that a shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary on December 14, 2012 did, in fact, take place.

Speculation that the shooting did not occur is not welcome here.

Thank you.
-------------

The following brief video was recently posted to another thread on this site. It is
a clip from a three-hour Freedom of Information Commission Hearing: Jack Gillum and the Associated Press v. the Newtown Police Department,
which can be viewed in its entirety here.

In it, Connecticut State Attorney Stephen Sedensky is asked the following question at 2:35:

“Are you aware of any federal arrests related to the incident at Sandy Hook?”

Observe the response:

I didn't hear anything close to a definite "no" in there. Did you? I wonder why.

Could his silence on the matter be related to this bit of information from a December 2013 Christian Science Monitor article?

The day of the shootings, the Associated Press faxed a FOI request to the Newtown Police Department seeking, among other records, copies of the
911 recordings. After receiving no response for more than a month, the AP made additional requests, but still received no response. On Jan. 23, 2013,
it appealed to the state Freedom of Information Commission.

Near the end of February, the police formally rejected the AP’s request, saying the information was to be used in “prospective law enforcement
action,” and thus did not have to be released.

What "prospective law enforcement action" was in play so long after the event, with the sole suspect deceased? Why the apparent evasion by State
Attorney Sedensky of what sounds like a straightforward question? In your opinion, does it seem like he might be aware of a federal arrest related to
the Sandy Hook shooting? Something the media isn't being told, or at least isn't reporting on?

Any additional pieces of this puzzle that you can provide will be heartily appreciated.

I'm not trying to exonerate anybody, but I noticed that the guy being asked the question didn't want to clearly answer the 1st question either. It
seems like he doesn't want to clearly answer any question, not just the federal arrest question.

I believe that due to mistaken identity, his brother was arrested, by Federal officials, and released after questioning. He was arrested in connection
with, and originally thought to be involved in, the murders, but was cleared. If you rememeber, there was also some discussion of his girlfriend being
involved. Never heard if she was arrested or not.

And for those that want to nit pick, the brother was arrested. The definition of arrest being detained and held for questioning, and not free to go.
Was he fingerprinted and booked? Unknown. He was, however, shown in an image in what appeared to be handcuffs, and "detained for questioning".

Oh, forgot to add, as for the prospective law enforcement thing, the DA was quoted as saying that the investigation, at one point, was still ongoing,
and that he could not rule out other shooters until the investigation was complete. Also, not certain if this is what he was referring to.

It was not until the "Official" report came out, stating only one shooter, that the tapes were released. Actually, I think it was days, maybe a week
or so before.

It was several months later that the full spectrum of videos, tapes, and photos were quietly released. December 21st, 2013, iirc. Or somewhere close
to that date.

As a 3rd party observer who is not well versed on the tie-in to the Sandy hook shootings and how they pertain to 9-11, I can only say, "Ahhh, yes.
Lawyers."

I do not know or comprehend the insinuations being made vis-a-vis this video and the Sandy Hook/9-11 events, yet, regardless of that, this sounds to
me like typical lawyer speak. So, while I have no understanding how any comments in the video will exonerate/prosecute anyone, I can tell you the
lawyer sounds like he's operating on sound ground.

So...here's my beef. Sure, the lawyer is within his rights.

But.

That's exactly what's wrong with our nation that nobody will stand up and argue against (probably b/c it's a hard case to fight)

Our nation has fallen to the same consequences as Rome. There are too many laws and not enough common sense/citizen buy-in to know the difference.
Regardless of this particular case/events, the AP lawyer will likely never know the answers to his questions because we have become a nation of
lawyers.

By the way, you may want to retain a lawyer for yourself because I intend to sue the world for breathing my air.

gardener
did they ever dig deeper into why the Medical Examiner was acting all woozy then diabolically giggly like he was on something?

That report by the ME was what got the hair on my neck raised. He stood there and claimed that he and 4 other docs and 11 assistants had completed
autopsies on 25 children in less than 10 hours. That would mean 5 teams would have to do 5 full autopsies for each team. I've seen some autopsies
and know that it takes at least 3-4 hours to complete that procedure. That number of people could not physically perform full autopsies on that many
people in such a short time. They might have had time to simply open a Y-incision and have a look about but to do a full exam---each organ must be
removed, charted and weighed, samples taken and then closure of the remains. His claims were the most bizarre part of that entire day to me.
I could understand and accept that there was a lot of confusion on the day of the incident and that "journalists" put their mouths in gear before
engaging their brains. But this guy is a professional and the statements that he made were just out of the realm of belief for anyone who knows
anything at all about the procedures of which he is speaking.
His claim was that he got the remains in a temporary shelter at about 1 AM on the evening of the incident, photographed each victim then did
identifications with the next-of-kin, then transported them to the morgue and finished the autopsies before 11 AM the next morning. His timeline just
isn't believable at all.

I think 10 hours is a plausible time period. With five doctors that's 2 hours each, probably allowing the assistants to close the incision to
further expedite the procedure. Some of the families may have requested a religious consideration leaving the ME a little discretion as to the
extent of the autopsy; especially with such an obvious cause of death.

I think 10 hours is a plausible time period. With five doctors that's 2 hours each, probably allowing the assistants to close the incision to
further expedite the procedure. Some of the families may have requested a religious consideration leaving the ME a little discretion as to the
extent of the autopsy; especially with such an obvious cause of death.

If that was the case, where were these autopsies performed? If the qualified examiners were moving on to the next body, and assistants were suturing,
there has to be a lot of tables to lay the bodies out on. I don't believe they could made just any folding table do the job either. There is blood
(and a lot of it) to wash off, there is the cataloguing of the separate organs (then putting them back into the cavity) and cleanup of the bodies
again and bagging afterwards.
I wonder how many tables they had to work with? And how many sets of instruments.

There was never any contention even in the state about an ongoing investigation, or possible Federal involvement "if it were warranted"

I believe (and I could be very wrong as I hate this topic with passion nowadays) that the CSP did state they were looking at other tie-in's and were
still keeping it an open investigation. That was as recently as 3 weeks ago when asked on WTIC, so they are still considering, at least on the fringe
that there may have been another suspect, in that case there WOULD be a Federal arrest and charge, but to this point there has been none, hence the
lack of a definite no.

The following is my personal opinion, and I fully expect that people will not like it..

I think everyone here that is posting anything that says HOAX in it with regards to this is severely delusional and needs help fast. Not everything
that happens int eh world is a major government conspiracy to take away (insert theory of the week here) from you, sometimes people do snap and in
this economy and with all the the turmoil in the world we're seeing it more and more. People have been harping on Carver for his attitude, but did
you know he hadn't slept in two days prior to that press conference? Well gee if I were him I'd look worse than that, but now it's some big point
of poking fun or ridicule and OH MY OGD HE'S IN ON IT.. OH MY GOD THEY TORE DOWN THE SCHOOL TO KEEP ANYONE FROM FINDING OU THTE TRUTH...

NO THEY DID NOT.... THE TOWN VOTED ON IT IN TRUE DEMOCRATIC FASHION..... sorry but your theory went out the window there, the ENTIRE town voted
overwhelmingly to demolish.. are they ALL in on it?

C'mon use some common sense, yes there are things in the OS that make little to no sense and may never make sense, but a giant gun grabbing
conspiracy it isn't..

On Saturday, December 15, 2012, all of the victims were transported to the OCME in
Farmington for autopsies; autopsies were performed the same day. The cause of death for all of
the victims was determined to have been gunshot wounds; the manner of death was determined
to have been homicide.36

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.